Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 76

Thread: What Lens are truly Freeform?

  1. #51
    Master OptiBoarder
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Austin
    Occupation
    Optical Retail
    Posts
    536
    Quote Originally Posted by TLG View Post
    Well, the Ipseo is also full freeform but nobody uses that so that leaves the DRx. ALL of the other Physio flavors have a molded front PAL design and are 'digitally surfaced' on the backside; yes, the front side mold IS cast from a digitally surfaced glass mold and yes, they ARE cut on CNC generators... but few people (outside of Essilor) would agree that that make it 'freeform' - it is not. As far as "dual add" goes, consider that half of the 'duo' is molded onto the front, with the other half - and the rest of the PAL design and Rx - digitally surfaced on the back. I'll let you decide if that is a 'true' freeform.
    Essilor is far from alone in being vague about their product technology.
    Thanks for the follow up Tony. I'm furiously studying the subject right now. It appears that

    Physio Enhanced FIT, Physio Enhanced Eyecode, and Ipseo Eyecode all take into account monocular PD, Fitting Height, Frame Wrap, Panto, VD and some the (special Eyecode/Head Cape/Posture) which would may place them in the category of a freeform.

    The DrX only accounts for PD, Fitting Height, but PAL is cut on backside. For what its worth, I would not consider this in the category of a freeform. To me, its more akin to a traditional lens being digitally surfaced on the backside, part way there, but no cigar. No ability to move the optimal reading zone around as one would normally do with a free form lense.


    The others mentioned, all appear to be true freeforms, but then they have to throw a wrench into the equation by having this so called DUALOPTIX. As you mention, its hard to know what this would do. I perceive it as a "set" PAL on the frontside, with a "freeform" PAL on the back and it somehow compensates the front design. My gut feel concerning the molded PAL on the front, is that it would ruin the whole reason for going freeform in the first place, but what do I know about this subject, next to nothing, at least compared to the gurus :) To me, a big part of using a PAL freeform design is to provide the ability to adjust the corridor length and move the reading zone to the most optimal position in the frame, and it feels like a molded PAL on the front side would hamper the ability to do this?

  2. #52
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Grove City
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by sharpstick777 View Post
    I would counter that there is no one BEST lens. Different lifestyles have different needs, so the Best Lens is the lens that compliments a patients lifestyle the most. In general Wider Fields of view are good, but it depends where that wideness falls. Although the Auto II is immensely better than the Comfort, the reading can actually be narrower in the Auto II. If my patient reads a lot, she would be disappointed with her new lenses. There are Free-form lenses with wider reading than the Comfort though, but you get my drift.

    It should be noted too, that those lenses requiring advanced measurements such as Panto, Wrap and Face Form will only benefit about 10% of our patient based on RX. I see myself better in the Spectrum than the Auto II in my low RX.
    You say there are freeform lenses with wider channels than the comfort? which ones? I've tried moving a couple people from the comfort to the Auto II, unique, etc... and most I've had to switch back? One pt brought in a display visually showing me what he was seeing with both ( he was a wierdo, oops i mean an engineer..) Also, what are some of you using if a pt wants or needs a really wide intermediate but still have a low seg ht, other than restyling to a larger one? I feel most people would benefit from a wider intermediate than reading due to all the electronic gadgets we use.

  3. #53
    Master OptiBoarder OptiBoard Silver Supporter
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Seattle WA
    Occupation
    Optical Wholesale Lab (other positions)
    Posts
    2,746
    If you are interested in better computer area than the Auto II, the widest I have seen is the Seiko Surmount, the second widest the Definity, the third the Hoya ID. The last two are Plus shaped in the effective area so the distance narrows significantly. In both the Definity and the Hoya ID I only turn my head a hair in the distance and it gets blurry. With the Surmount I get an effective distance zone that is about 5 or 6 times wider than the Plus shaped lenses mentioned, the Surmount is more Barrell shaped for the effective areas. Any of these will give you about 5-8 times the intermediate zone of the Auto II or Comfort, and about 1.5x more reading. The Definity does have more reading than the Surmount by about 25% but it will depend on RX.
    Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy ~Benjamin Franklin

  4. #54
    Objection! shanbaum's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Manchester, CT USA
    Occupation
    Other Optical Manufacturer or Vendor
    Posts
    2,927
    Quote Originally Posted by GokhanSF View Post
    Essilor doesn't have a true freeform yet, so consider Shamir AutoII, Hoya ID, Zeiss Individual, and Kodak Unique.
    That is incorrect, see, e.g., the Ideal.

  5. #55
    OptiBoard Apprentice
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Vancouver B.C.
    Occupation
    Optometrist
    Posts
    48
    I tier Free Form lenses this way: Lowest tier is first generation Free Form, the optics are better but are not compensated for vertex, panto, and wrap. Regardless of sphere power and cylinder power, the lensometer measured Rx will match the written Rx. Next tier is Free form designed with published default values for vertex, panto, and wrap. There is a compensated Rx which will be different than the written Rx for high spheres, high cylinders, and high adds. The next tier is topography unique to each prescription with some default values and some customizable values. For example Seiko has a Wrap Tech where the wrap measure is required with the order. Again, there is a compensated Rx. The top tier is fully customizeable for vertex, tilt, and wrap - though if the optician does not provide the numbers, the program will use default values. With these criterea in mind, I study the lenses, quiz the reps, and tier lenses within any given brand. For Hoya, look at Lifestyle, In Style, and My Style. For the Physio look at Enhanced, Enhanced Fit, Enhanced Fit with Eye Code. Using this method you can tier the Reveal and also private label Free Form lenses independent labs are bringing to market.

    I should add that you can tier Free Form lenses into good better best, however the 'best' lenses will have the same optics as the 'better' lens if the optician measures that vertex, panto, and tilt are very close to default values. Additional customization will yield the same optical result. Also, in low sphere powers with little cylinder and low adds, the good better and best are likely to be clinically equivalent in terms of optics. Use optics equations to calculate the compensated Rx to verify this is true. (I trust the optiBoard gurus to set me straight if I have any of this wrong. I love this group!)

    One additional comment. I am of the opinion that the power profile from the fitting cross to the full add is a huge determinant of patient satisfaction. Some patients enjoy short corridor lenses, and some prefer longer corridors. Top tier lenses give the optician the freedom to order both a fitting height and a fixed segment height, and the optician can tailor the fixed segment height based upon the previous progressive min fit height and changes in prescription and the patient's report about what they wish they could improve over their previous progressive. From what I have seen, all of the great software programs for top tier progressives are taking a history including questions about the previous lens worn and patient satisfaction.

    I hope this helps. I'd like to see a whole discussion around the concept of tailoring Free Form progressives....and it is possible I missed it. I haven't been on OptiBoard for a while.

    Cheers,
    Renee Kathleen Jacobs O.D., M.A.
    Director Practice Management Depot
    www.PracticeManagementDepot.com

  6. #56
    Master OptiBoarder
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Austin
    Occupation
    Optical Retail
    Posts
    536
    Quote Originally Posted by RKJ View Post
    I should add that you can tier Free Form lenses into good better best, however the 'best' lenses will have the same optics as the 'better' lens if the optician measures that vertex, panto, and tilt are very close to default values. Additional customization will yield the same optical result. Cheers,
    That is an excellent point that I hadn't considered. Although you probably can not make a blanket statement like that, because the design may not be as good to begin with, although you would think it would be. I say this because even a non free form PAL might work better than this tier you refer to. So you could probably extrapolate that over to FF as well.

  7. #57
    OptiBoard Novice
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Braintree
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    1
    The Zeiss Individual and the Zeiss Gradal Top 3D are two freeform lenses that I deal with most often

  8. #58
    OptiBoard Apprentice
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Honduras
    Occupation
    Optometrist
    Posts
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by AustinEyewear View Post
    Thanks for the follow up Tony. I'm furiously studying the subject right now. It appears that

    Physio Enhanced FIT, Physio Enhanced Eyecode, and Ipseo Eyecode all take into account monocular PD, Fitting Height, Frame Wrap, Panto, VD and some the (special Eyecode/Head Cape/Posture) which would may place them in the category of a freeform.

    Your gut feeling is correct.What will the big E do with millions of $$$ worth of front molded progressive lens inventory and equipment,they can't discard them over night,so they might as well ask their marketing gurus to keep on marketing their molded front side progressives ' Enhancing' them with back side digital surfacing.It's all about money


    The DrX only accounts for PD, Fitting Height, but PAL is cut on backside. For what its worth, I would not consider this in the category of a freeform. To me, its more akin to a traditional lens being digitally surfaced on the backside, part way there, but no cigar. No ability to move the optimal reading zone around as one would normally do with a free form lense.


    The others mentioned, all appear to be true freeforms, but then they have to throw a wrench into the equation by having this so called DUALOPTIX. As you mention, its hard to know what this would do. I perceive it as a "set" PAL on the frontside, with a "freeform" PAL on the back and it somehow compensates the front design. My gut feel concerning the molded PAL on the front, is that it would ruin the whole reason for going freeform in the first place, but what do I know about this subject, next to nothing, at least compared to the gurus :) To me, a big part of using a PAL freeform design is to provide the ability to adjust the corridor length and move the reading zone to the most optimal position in the frame, and it feels like a molded PAL on the front side would hamper the ability to do this?
    Your gut feeling is correct.What will the big E do with millions of $$$$ worth on molded front side lens inventory and the equipment to manufacture it.They might as well ask their marketing gurus to keep 'marketing' their molded semifinished blanks,and so they came up with their 'enhanced' marketing theory,front side mold progressive with digitally surfaced,aspheric,atoric back side.You can do this with any other front side digital mold progressive brand.

  9. #59
    OptiBoard Apprentice
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Honduras
    Occupation
    Optometrist
    Posts
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by AustinEyewear View Post
    Thanks for the follow up Tony. I'm furiously studying the subject right now. It appears that

    Physio Enhanced FIT, Physio Enhanced Eyecode, and Ipseo Eyecode all take into account monocular PD, Fitting Height, Frame Wrap, Panto, VD and some the (special Eyecode/Head Cape/Posture) which would may place them in the category of a freeform.

    Your gut feeling is correct.What will the big E do with millions of $$$ worth of front molded progressive lens inventory and equipment,they can't discard them over night,so they might as well ask their marketing gurus to keep on marketing their molded front side progressives ' Enhancing' them with back side digital surfacing.It's all about money


    The DrX only accounts for PD, Fitting Height, but PAL is cut on backside. For what its worth, I would not consider this in the category of a freeform. To me, its more akin to a traditional lens being digitally surfaced on the backside, part way there, but no cigar. No ability to move the optimal reading zone around as one would normally do with a free form lense.


    The others mentioned, all appear to be true freeforms, but then they have to throw a wrench into the equation by having this so called DUALOPTIX. As you mention, its hard to know what this would do. I perceive it as a "set" PAL on the frontside, with a "freeform" PAL on the back and it somehow compensates the front design. My gut feel concerning the molded PAL on the front, is that it would ruin the whole reason for going freeform in the first place, but what do I know about this subject, next to nothing, at least compared to the gurus :) To me, a big part of using a PAL freeform design is to provide the ability to adjust the corridor length and move the reading zone to the most optimal position in the frame, and it feels like a molded PAL on the front side would hamper the ability to do this?
    Your gut feeling is correct.What will the big E do with millions of $$$$ worth on molded front side lens inventory and the equipment to manufacture it.They might as well ask their marketing gurus to keep 'marketing' their molded semifinished blanks,and so they came up with their 'enhanced' marketing theory,front side mold progressive with digitally surfaced,aspheric,atoric back side.You can do this with any other front side digital mold progressive brand.

  10. #60
    Rising Star n711's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Oregon
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    85
    Quote Originally Posted by GokhanSF View Post
    True and False.... Lenscrafters and Walmart uses discontinued Shamir lenses which means your patient cannot get the latest technology lens they offer from them
    .
    Thank you so much Gok!!! That makes much more sence than them getting the same product as us "independents" .... I wonder if the Wally-World or LC employees even know what they are using?????

  11. #61
    OptiBoard Apprentice
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Vancouver B.C.
    Occupation
    Optometrist
    Posts
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by dash1 View Post
    I've tried moving a couple people from the comfort to the Auto II, unique, etc... and most I've had to switch back?
    This representative was incredibly knowledgeable when I was looking at similar challenges.

    Jerry Thornhill
    Technical Services
    Shamir Insight, Inc. | 9938 Via Pasar, San Diego, CA 92126
    T: (858) 444-3863| C: (858) 740-6518 | F: (877) 285-4863
    jthornhill@shamirlens.com

    Jerry said successfully moving patients from Comfort to Autograph II is a challenge, and that the Spectrum design is especially good for these patients and also for patients with higher plus prescriptions. You might want to talk with him.

    I had a lengthy conversation with a Kodak Unique rep at Vision Expo East. My contention is that the software does not allow the optician to tailor the lens. All big frames get long corridors by default, even if the patient has successfully and happily worn a short corridor prior to the Unique. In my opinion, that is the reason so many offices experienced failure with Free Form when they tried to move patients wearing traditional Essilor lenses to Kodak Unique lenses.

    The rep essentially explained that the optician should always put the patient into the longest corridor possible, for Every Day progressives AND sell second pair computer progressives. I was not persuaded. Personally, I greatly prefer to wear short corridor lenses. AND, I believe ECPs should have a well defined comprehensive product mix with Free Form lenses a skilled optician can tailor to the patient rather than letting the software tailor progressives to the frame selected. Because so many offices have had non-adapt problems with Kodak Unique, it is not high on my list of favorite lenses.
    Renee Kathleen Jacobs O.D., M.A.
    Director Practice Management Depot
    www.PracticeManagementDepot.com

  12. #62
    OptiBoard Novice
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    4
    I am also a huge fan of the the Zeiss Individual lens. I have had great success with fitting this lens.

  13. #63
    OptiBoard Apprentice
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Vancouver B.C.
    Occupation
    Optometrist
    Posts
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by spekladie View Post
    I am also a huge fan of the the Zeiss Individual lens. I have had great success with fitting this lens.
    Thank you SpekLadie.

    I did not mean to sound like I am promoting Shamir, though I did mean to sound less than enamored with the Kodak Unique. I prefer lenses that allow the optician to tailor the Free Form power progression.

    There are many Free Form progressives that can be customized. Zeiss, Seiko, Shamir, Hoya, and independent labs with private label Free Form lenses - All have Free Form lenses that allow the optician to specify the fixed fitting height.
    Renee Kathleen Jacobs O.D., M.A.
    Director Practice Management Depot
    www.PracticeManagementDepot.com

  14. #64
    OptiBoard Novice OptiBoard Bronze Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Petaluma
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    3
    Just saw this post and thought I'd add 2 cents.

    Freeform and digital surfacing are manufacturing methods that can accomplish a designers targets for their lenses. The levels of "freeform" that was the original request of the post for good, better and best for me are defined by the level of optimization i.e., combined progressive and Rx, atoric, optimized (compensated for peripheral errors using default fitting values), fully optimized using position of wear values, personalized adding either wavefront, lifestyle or head turn, eye mover, eye center rotation distance. However, the success of the designs are still based on the original designer's (companies) design philosophy.

    I added a variety of posts on this on the Opticians Handbook (opticianshandbook.com) Freeform pages. You might find the information helpful in addition to these posts.

    Mark
    Mark Mattison-Shupnick
    Dir., Education and Training, Jobson Medical Information LLC

  15. #65
    Always learning OptiBoard Bronze Supporter
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Wauwatosa Wi
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    3,040
    Quote Originally Posted by RKJ View Post
    My contention is that the software does not allow the optician to tailor the lens. All big frames get long corridors by default...
    Not only that, but for narrow frames, the software will decrease the corridor length for those who rarely read with their eyeglasses (distance -2.50 DS Add +2.50). Many PALs do this now, including those from Zeiss, Essilor, Shamir, and others. At least Shamir offers a fixed lens for those dispensing opticians that are giving some thought to what this all means, from the wearer's perspective.

    The rep essentially explained that the optician should always put the patient into the longest corridor possible, for Every Day progressives AND sell second pair computer progressives.
    That's what I do with my eyeglasses, and for most of my clients (Adds over +2.00) who have significant intermediate tasks. I wouldn't necessarily use the longest corridor, but I would choose a PAL design that had above average distance vision, something you won't find with any of the more aggressive short corridor PALs.
    Robert Martellaro
    Roberts Optical Ltd.
    Wauwatosa Wi.
    www.roberts-optical.com
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    “Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself"
    -Richard Feynman
    ~~~~~~~~~~~
    A mime-free zone.

  16. #66
    Rising Star
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Toronto
    Occupation
    Lens Manufacturer
    Posts
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by sharpstick777 View Post
    Kurt, could you please clarify what you define as "compensated"? There is some word in the market that only Free-form lenses that offer "customized" vertex, face form and panto calculations are truly better. However, I have seen usage studies from both manufacturers and universities where only about 11% of patients benefit from those advanced compensations (Essilors says 9%).

    All true-free form are compenstated with at atoric, base curve, ect, and most use standard averages of tilt and vertex. So when you say "compenstated" are refering to the standard ones, or the fully customized ones?

    And if you mean that only the highly customized compensated lenses are better, do you have any usage studies your company has done (or at least read) to support that? Right now the ones I have seen do not.
    Perhaps I can help you, IOT supplies true freeform software to manufacture lenses so that the lens performs like the Rx that the OD prescribed no matter what the position of wear plus they have many design options to meet the lifestyle and ergonomic needs of the patient. IOT are one of the true free form companies, Rodenstock also comes to mind with their new offerings. Another point IOT is 50% owned by Younger so I guess that they are at least half American (if that's important)

  17. #67
    Master OptiBoarder OptiBoard Silver Supporter
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Seattle WA
    Occupation
    Optical Wholesale Lab (other positions)
    Posts
    2,746
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Mattison-Shup View Post
    Mark Mattison-Shupnick
    Dir., Education and Training, Jobson Medical Information LLC
    Welcome to Optiboard Mark... how were you never here before?
    Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy ~Benjamin Franklin

  18. #68
    Rising Star
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Toronto
    Occupation
    Lens Manufacturer
    Posts
    55
    Our lens design considers the position of wear and tailors the full reading zone of our standard lens to start at 23 degrees downward gaze, it is independent of the depth of the frame but requires the fitter to establish the face form, vertex and pantoscopic angle.

  19. #69
    OptiBoard Novice OptiBoard Bronze Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Petaluma
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    3
    Thank you Robert M. and yes you are correct. Many of the lenses that are optimized use the fitting height and B of the frame to deliver a corridor length that is manufacturer determined, not dispenser chosen. As a result, as you and others have found out that a patient moving from a short corridor molded lens may in a freeform replacement, in a larger B frame get a longer corridor. The result is a chin up, tilt to get to the reading.

    As you and Peter S. point out, the higher the add, the more important that the corridor not be lengthened since the need of the over +2.25 Add wearer is a shorter (me being one of them) rather than longer path to reading. With no reserve reading needs to be where it is comfortable. So, the onus is on the dispenser to really understand the lenses that they are using. If the frame is larger, the corridor will usually be longer so record the design used in the habitual eyewear, then understand if the patient was happy. You might be doing them a favor lengthening the corridor for available intermediate, but they will notice the difference.

    The design options are large and as most on this forum know, just being a freeformed lens does not mean that the lens is any better. Digitally enhancing lenses is an opportunity for opticians to differentiate themselves from the online sellers. In fact, as I usually teach in classes I'm fortunate ot present, optimized single vision is the better opportunity. In progressives, there's still unwanted error that we must manage.

    Sharpstick - been lurking at times in the background. As you know, there's limited time to participate everywhere. Thanks, Mark

  20. #70
    OptiWizard
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    On a Ship of Fools
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    345
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter J Shaw OD View Post
    Our lens design considers the position of wear and tailors the full reading zone of our standard lens to start at 23 degrees downward gaze, it is independent of the depth of the frame but requires the fitter to establish the face form, vertex and pantoscopic angle.

    What should the "fitter" use to accurately measure those values?

    Do you provide a high quality measuring tool to do these measurements?

  21. #71
    Master OptiBoarder OptiBoard Silver Supporter
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Seattle WA
    Occupation
    Optical Wholesale Lab (other positions)
    Posts
    2,746
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Mattison-Shup View Post
    As you and Peter S. point out, the higher the add, the more important that the corridor not be lengthened since the need of the over +2.25 Add wearer is a shorter (me being one of them) rather than longer path to reading.
    Sharpstick - been lurking at times in the background. As you know, there's limited time to participate everywhere. Thanks, Mark
    Mark, If you shorten the corridor, in a higher add, you can reach a point where you effectively destroy the intermediate. Although its easier to get the reading in a short corridor lens (and the reading effectively larger) its at the cost of mid-range and intermediate. Each step just gets too small to be useful, like a set of stairs where each step is only an inch.

    Many of us use the intermediate far more than our reading, cel phone use and all.
    Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy ~Benjamin Franklin

  22. #72
    OptiBoard Novice OptiBoard Bronze Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Petaluma
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    3
    Mark, If you shorten the corridor, in a higher add, you can reach a point where you effectively destroy the intermediate. Yes, wearing a 2.50 add now demonstrates the variety of manufacturer's designs that work better or worse than others for intermediate. No argument that too short is ineffective for intermediate but its the "Goldilocks" design that works for me, not too short, certainly not long, just right. Regardless, they are all general purpose and I wear computer progressives at the laptop.

    Since the thread started about freeform and the variability of the received corridor length, having a maximum length, regardless of B unless otherwise stated is a reasonable attribute (Thanks Peter).
    Mark

  23. #73
    OptiBoard Apprentice
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Vancouver B.C.
    Occupation
    Optometrist
    Posts
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by Diopterman View Post
    What should the "fitter" use to accurately measure those values?

    Do you provide a high quality measuring tool to do these measurements?
    This is a two part response:

    1. I am very interested to know what tools offices are using to take vertex, panto, and wrap measures. I know of the Shamir panorameter kit. Does anyone here have top of the mind knowledge of all of the hand held and automated options for taking these measures?

    2. Peter, like Diopterman, I am interested to know how you are teaching methods for taking measures accurate enough to ensure the most natural visual experience through the lenses.

    It has been my experience that the expense of automated tools is one of the hurdles to widespread acceptance of Free Form lenses. I anticipate that this challenge is a problem for independent designers like you, especially with the growing success of automated tools, and growing belief that they are necessary for providing best possible measures.

    Having said that, Free Form lenses have wider sweet spots and should be more forgiving of small measurement errors than conventional progressives. Peter, what is working best for you, and if possible, any tips on what to avoid?
    Renee Kathleen Jacobs O.D., M.A.
    Director Practice Management Depot
    www.PracticeManagementDepot.com

  24. #74
    OptiBoard Novice
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    danyang
    Occupation
    Lens Manufacturer
    Posts
    3
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	3  1.56 free form progressive.JPG 
Views:	98 
Size:	17.7 KB 
ID:	8600

  25. #75
    OptiWizard
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    On a Ship of Fools
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    345
    Quote Originally Posted by opticallens View Post
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	3  1.56 free form progressive.JPG 
Views:	98 
Size:	17.7 KB 
ID:	8600
    Do you have a picture of a left lens to confirm that these are truly free form?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. freeform progressive lens
    By au in forum Progressive Lens Discussion Forum
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 08-19-2010, 04:47 PM
  2. Freeform Lens Production...?
    By DMdrummer13 in forum General Optics and Eyecare Discussion Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 05-15-2010, 10:08 AM
  3. FreeForm Lens- Whats the best?
    By mm92103 in forum Progressive Lens Discussion Forum
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 04-30-2010, 07:34 AM
  4. Freeform lens Mapper
    By mahmoud.hamza in forum Progressive Lens Discussion Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-19-2010, 01:01 PM
  5. Ordering 1 freeform lens
    By TLG in forum General Optics and Eyecare Discussion Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-16-2010, 03:31 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
OptiBoard is proudly sponsored by:
Identity Optical, Younger Optics, Carl Zeiss Vision, Vision Systems, Inc. and Chemistrie Eyewear